Any item is only worth what people are willing to pay. I'm trying to sell a Profoto Pro7a and Pro7 head. Retails for $11000 US. I got one offer for $2000. I almost choked on my breakfast I was laughing so hard

Unfortunately, if I can't find anyone willing to pay my asking price, then my items simply are not worth my asking price, no matter what. Luckily, I can afford to sit on the equipment and wait for consumer confidence to rebound. I would rather do that than drop $2000 off my price just to get a quick sale.

Well, the recession is here and if I was to buy an old digital back, multishot or not, I wouldn't pay all that much for it at this point. 1 year ago, maybe. But honestly with all the new tools coming in the next 2 months to 2 years, and older digital back doesn't sound as appealing anymore. kind of one trick ponies. Its not that a digital back isn't useful, but its a very specific tool when I'm finding that the way I've been able to stay afloat is to not just specialize, but to spread out my reach a little bit and be flexible. I'm shooting products and people right now and working on a movie as a DP. That being said, I don't think its necessarily sad, but if you're trying to sell a back it might be.

Dear forum users, i am a bit puzzled. I am about to sell or more exact trying to sell or even putting for sale some of my wonderfull used digiback's but it seems 2nd hand market has collapsed also. I have a 528c, wich is a multishot back from hasselblad/Imacon for sale and i thought that about 6500 euro would be a realistic asking price for a back that has multishot, microstep and comes with an adapter at choice( contax 645 or hassieH ). But no! some people are convinced that it is worth only 4000 euro. They seem to forget what a back such as this cost's at the moment or what is the trade in valeu when buing a new big back.Do other people have the same feeling about the ridiculous prices they get for fine good equipment? Or is it just me? It really puts me down becaurse this means that also professional photography is in the downwoarts spiral as 35mm equipment is for a few years.A sad belgian photographer....

there is a flood of the smaller ixpress on ebay now..I doubt they will get 2,00euro..good backs but over 3-5 years old now.with no trade in anymore from manufactures.. the true resale value of these will soon be painfully evident. I would take what you can get today for it, because it will not go up in value..sorry to say. MF Digital equipment is finally reflecting the de-inflationary reality of the photo industry.. sad but true.

For 4500 I will take it off your hands No kidding, I had my totally overhauled CF39 for sale for quite awhile. Nobody interested unless I would give it away. I have kept it as a backup. The inability to trade-up nowadays will have to create a 2nd hand market but at this moment I think many people are waiting until the dust clears to see what are reasonable prices.

Lastly, people are feared they are or will be affected by a recession. Not exactly the climate in which many will be making big purchases. Makes you wonder how much new sales are impacted.

Ah well, I don't really care. I am set for the moment and have focussed my investments on glass & light for the near future. I had the best year ever, don't expect next year to be as good and it doesn't have to. Would be great if it is naturally

It is amazing how many people believe you need the latest and most expensive back to get great results. There are not that many new backs that will match the quality of the 528 in 4-shot, even in single shot it delivers excellent results.

Dear forum users, i am a bit puzzled. I am about to sell or more exact trying to sell or even putting for sale some of my wonderfull used digiback's but it seems 2nd hand market has collapsed also. I have a 528c, wich is a multishot back from hasselblad/Imacon for sale and i thought that about 6500 euro would be a realistic asking price for a back that has multishot, microstep and comes with an adapter at choice( contax 645 or hassieH ). But no! some people are convinced that it is worth only 4000 euro. They seem to forget what a back such as this cost's at the moment or what is the trade in valeu when buing a new big back.Do other people have the same feeling about the ridiculous prices they get for fine good equipment? Or is it just me? It really puts me down becaurse this means that also professional photography is in the downwoarts spiral as 35mm equipment is for a few years.A sad belgian photographer....

Do you know how much this back is worth if you trade it in for a new big H'blad? (rhetorical question obviously...)

For 4500 I will take it off your hands No kidding, I had my totally overhauled CF39 for sale for quite awhile. Nobody interested unless I would give it away. I have kept it as a backup. The inability to trade-up nowadays will have to create a 2nd hand market but at this moment I think many people are waiting until the dust clears to see what are reasonable prices.

Lastly, people are feared they are or will be affected by a recession. Not exactly the climate in which many will be making big purchases. Makes you wonder how much new sales are impacted.

Ah well, I don't really care. I am set for the moment and have focussed my investments on glass & light for the near future. I had the best year ever, don't expect next year to be as good and it doesn't have to. Would be great if it is naturally

It is amazing how many people believe you need the latest and most expensive back to get great results. There are not that many new backs that will match the quality of the 528 in 4-shot, even in single shot it delivers excellent results.

I would be very tempted at 4500 as well - let me know if you don't sell it to dustbak.btw yaya suggests tradein price.. even if hasselblad would give him one at this point..instead of getting some cash back from the intitial investment he would be looking at what 14 thousand euro to upgradeto a new back that gives you as good as files? the manufactures love those terms - and I would love to see a direct comparisonbetween this multishot back against anything just released....bring it on!

One would give 4,5k but not 6,5K euro. That means that you do not want to work one or two days extra for the back? Maybe i better find someone who wants to buy a new expensive back and make a deal with him??

The 528C is a terrific back, very nice 4-shot files. Hold onto it. The 528C in 4-shot mode produces a file sharper than a one-shot 39mp back. I looked into buying a used one a year and a half ago and the going rate was around $17K with a Hasselblad one year (maybe 6 month) warranty.

I have discussed this with some of my peers, and while the backs seem to produce exemplary image quality, many photographers look at photos as reproduced at point-of-purchase displays, magazines, etc., etc and can not tell which camera was used to shoot what image. For example I just shot something for point-of-purchase for Bergdorf Goodman, Neimans, etc. on a 1Ds3 and it will sit right next to other advertising which was shot with 4x5 film, 39mp back, etc. And photographers go stick their noses up to the prints and can not tell what camera shot what - so why invest in the large clunky expensive stuff? I agree that the shape of 67 or 645 is nicer than 35mm, it feels good to shoot, etc. but when the client nor the consumer can percieve any advantage in terms of end-result IQ, and the economy in the sh*tter, then...no sale! Even on a reasonably priced lightly used back. I mean, I hear this time and time again from other photographers - about the lack of visible difference in the final reproduction, and I usually feel the same myself. (I have owned and rented Leaf, etc., etc.) Clients have not asked me for more pixels or higher IQ in YEARS. And I have shot for some very high end, high budget clients. I think just about the only time most of us can see which camera was used is when someone like Paolo Roversi has been shooting polaroid, or someone is using tilts with their view camera...otherwise, open up a magazine and tell me which camera shot what...for the most part, it's impossible as far as I can tell.

I am one of the "non-buyers" in this "unmarket". Having just waited almost 3 weeks to sell a mint Leica M8 for about 60% of what I paid for it less than two years ago, I feel all your pain.

There are three things behind this, as far as I can tell. (i) the economical climate is awful at the moment (be it perception or reality, it matters little) which makes everyone leery of high-dollar value purchases of rapidly depreciating capital items; (ii) 35mm FF has dropped from the 'stratospheric' heights of $8K for a body to the very walkable hilltops of $3K. So, for $3K I can have 22-24MPs, at 3-5fps, with dead-clean images up to 800 and usable up to 3200...... and (iii) many people think Nikon is about to enter the quasi-MF market with an innovative camera in the vein of the Leica S2, but at a price which will blow the MF camera and back makers out of the water. While it's all still vapourware, if Nikon actually lands a 30+MP, more-than-35mm camera for around $10K, the whole game will change. One would expect dead-quick and accurate AF, decent frame-rates, clean high-ISO, and seemless back-body integration. None of which any of the existing MF systems can offer, at any price.

I have discussed this with some of my peers, and while the backs seem to produce exemplary image quality, many photographers look at photos as reproduced at point-of-purchase displays, magazines, etc., etc and can not tell which camera was used to shoot what image. For example I just shot something for point-of-purchase for Bergdorf Goodman, Neimans, etc. on a 1Ds3 and it will sit right next to other advertising which was shot with 4x5 film, 39mp back, etc. And photographers go stick their noses up to the prints and can not tell what camera shot what - so why invest in the large clunky expensive stuff? I agree that the shape of 67 or 645 is nicer than 35mm, it feels good to shoot, etc. but when the client nor the consumer can percieve any advantage in terms of end-result IQ, and the economy in the sh*tter, then...no sale! Even on a reasonably priced lightly used back. I mean, I hear this time and time again from other photographers - about the lack of visible difference in the final reproduction, and I usually feel the same myself. (I have owned and rented Leaf, etc., etc.) Clients have not asked me for more pixels or higher IQ in YEARS. And I have shot for some very high end, high budget clients. I think just about the only time most of us can see which camera was used is when someone like Paolo Roversi has been shooting polaroid, or someone is using tilts with their view camera...otherwise, open up a magazine and tell me which camera shot what...for the most part, it's impossible as far as I can tell.

if you shoot with a lot of light (usually flash), or slower setups, more static imagery with a lot of post production manipulation medium format has it's place.

anything past that, continuous light, especially low or challanged light, fast moving subjects, quick changes and setups then I agree a 1ds3 is probably going to out perform nearly any medium format back. on my desk are two covers, one from harpers and the other from vanity fare and I know one was shot with a canon I assume the other also, given the photographer's history.

they both look fine, they both are printed reasonably well and the photographs and the photographers are well respected. shooting them with anything beyond a dslr would have been a waste of time and money.

right now, regardless of the new mf price reductions I believe the medium format still camera business is in for a tough ride.

the companies have been slow to respond to their customers main requests, the prices, even reduced are high and most importantly in this economy clients are demanding twice the output in 1/2 the time. this holds true for high profile and under the radar clients.

I also like the feel of a medium format camera and when shot properly it's a pleasure to use, but for commerce, even editorial in today's business climate we have to perform at a very fast pace and the dslrs are made for that.

we just finished a studio shoot that was perfect for medium format, but still just went with the canons. bottom line it was easier and faster, for me and for the client.

I own mf camera backs and don't see the point of selling them at a reduced, bargain basement rate, but it would take a very special project of circumstance for me to upgrade my backs to higher priced options and as lisa r says, nobody is asking for more file size.

clients are asking for more return on their investment. as photographers we have to do the same.

I have discussed this with some of my peers, and while the backs seem to produce exemplary image quality, many photographers look at photos as reproduced at point-of-purchase displays, magazines, etc., etc and can not tell which camera was used to shoot what image. For example I just shot something for point-of-purchase for Bergdorf Goodman, Neimans, etc. on a 1Ds3 and it will sit right next to other advertising which was shot with 4x5 film, 39mp back, etc. And photographers go stick their noses up to the prints and can not tell what camera shot what - so why invest in the large clunky expensive stuff? I agree that the shape of 67 or 645 is nicer than 35mm, it feels good to shoot, etc. but when the client nor the consumer can percieve any advantage in terms of end-result IQ, and the economy in the sh*tter, then...no sale! Even on a reasonably priced lightly used back. I mean, I hear this time and time again from other photographers - about the lack of visible difference in the final reproduction, and I usually feel the same myself. (I have owned and rented Leaf, etc., etc.) Clients have not asked me for more pixels or higher IQ in YEARS. And I have shot for some very high end, high budget clients. I think just about the only time most of us can see which camera was used is when someone like Paolo Roversi has been shooting polaroid, or someone is using tilts with their view camera...otherwise, open up a magazine and tell me which camera shot what...for the most part, it's impossible as far as I can tell.

yeah I hear you on all that BUT; when I pick up my 1 dsmk3 for a job, i dont feel any excitement. when i pick up my contax / Phase back i feel good. plain and simple. the canon feels lame in my hands. the contax feels like a professional camera. when you have to use a tool 3 days a week it feels good to have a great tool. the finished images DO look better with a zeisss lens or whatever med. format you use. the canons all feel very homogenous to me. so in the end it just comes down to how it makes YOU feel, not how it makes your client feel. if you can afford that warm fuzzy feeling then great, if not, then dont worry about it.... it wont matter to your client in the end.

yeah I hear you on all that BUT; when I pick up my 1 dsmk3 for a job, i dont feel any excitement. when i pick up my contax / Phase back i feel good. plain and simple. the canon feels lame in my hands. the contax feels like a professional camera. when you have to use a tool 3 days a week it feels good to have a great tool. the finished images DO look better with a zeisss lens or whatever med. format you use. the canons all feel very homogenous to me. so in the end it just comes down to how it makes YOU feel, not how it makes your client feel. if you can afford that warm fuzzy feeling then great, if not, then dont worry about it.... it wont matter to your client in the end.

Have to agree with this. I use a Leaf on a Cambo that is the most pleasant way for me to work so i do my best work that way.